The University of MaineDigitalCommons@UMaine

Psychology Faculty Scholarship Psychology

1985

Sticking to Syntax: The Reflection of StoryGrammar in Children's and Adult's Recall of Radioand Television ShowsDonald S. HayesUniversity of Maine - Main, donald.hayes@umit.maine.edu

Suzanne B. Kelly

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/psy_facpub

Part of the Psychology Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Psychology FacultyScholarship by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contactum.library.technical.services@maine.edu.

Repository CitationHayes, Donald S. and Kelly, Suzanne B., "Sticking to Syntax: The Reflection of Story Grammar in Children's and Adult's Recall ofRadio and Television Shows" (1985). Psychology Faculty Scholarship. 12.https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/psy_facpub/12

Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, Vol. 31, No.4

Sticking to Syntax: The Reflection of Story Grammar in Children's and Adults' Recall of

Radio and Television Shows

Donald S. Hayes and Suzanne B. Kelly University of Maine

Two studies were cond ucted to determine how well Mandler's (1983) story grammar, which was generated for oral or written discourse, predicts recall of televised stories. The studies also examined (a) whether the grammar could ac­count for recall of both narrative and non-narrative stories, and (b) whether de­velopmenta l differences exist in nodal recall for either television or radio. In Ex­periment 1, preschoolers viewed a televised story from "Sesame Street" that was non-narrative in nature. In Experiment 2, preschoolers and adults were ad­ministered a narrative via television or radio. In both studies, over two-thirds of subjects' retention reflected recall of nodal information, regardless of the me­dium of input. For all subjects, recall of setting, and outcome informat ion sur­passed that of reaction, ending, or beginning events.

It is clear that stories serve a major function in th e socialization of young children. Perhaps recognition of this fact has led to the in­creased study of how individuals come to comprehend both aurally­presented and written narratives (see Kintsch, 1977; Mandler & John­son, 1977). Unfortunately, little attention has been paid to how televised stories are comprehended, even though young children are estimated to spend between 3 and 4 hours each day in the presence of TV. Hence, the present research was directed toward learning more about media differences and similarities in story apprehension by young children and adults.

Recently, several models of story comprehension have been pro­posed (Mandler & Johnson, 1977; Stein & Glenn, 1979), all of which are relatively similar in their underlying assumptions. Each has been based on recall of aural or written narratives . Because it offers an

The work was supported in part by G rant 5645137 from the Spencer Foundation. Thanks are extended to George Wegler, Ken Getz, Julia Peebles-Seibert, Jane Hodges, ,md Marcia Mandel, for their aid with this project; and to the teachers and children at Mister MacGregor's Garden, for allowing us to conduct research at their schooL Re­Quests for reprints should be sent to Donald S. Hayes, Department of Psychology, Uni­versity of Maine, Orono, ME 04469.

Merrill-PafmerQuarterly, October 1985, Vol. 31 , No.4, pp. 345- 360. Copyright © 1985 by Wayne State University Press, Detroit Michigan 48202

345

346 MERRILL-PALMER QUARTERLY

elaboralion of age differences in slory o rgani zalion, as well as Ihe im· p lication that story comprehension may vary as a fun ction of inpul modalit y, the model proposed by M andler and johnson (1977) pro· vided the th eoreti cal basis for this research.

Basica lly, M andler (1983) assumes that most stori es reflect a type o f grammar, made of an underlying base structure and a set of rewrile rules. Th e base stru cture is composed of six nodes that represent set· ting, beginning, reacti on, attempt, outcome, and ending information. It is further assumed that these nodes exist as a generalized schema that individuals use for encod ing, organizing, and retrievi ng informa· tion. This schema not only speci fies th e types of in format ion that nor­mally occu'r in a story, but also the relation of one part to another (e.g., attempts precede outcomes).

At least for written or aural narratives, empirica l support exists for certain of M andler'S assumptions. For example, investigators have found that children have more difficulty recalling stories when the events deviate fro m the ord er specified by th e grammar (Mandler, 1978; M andler & DeForest, 1979; Stein & Glenn, 1979) . Moreover, grade-school children tend to reorder sto ry even ts into the standard grammatica l order during reca ll, even w hen the events are presented in a scrambled fash ion (Buss, Yussen, M athews, Miller, & Rembold, 1983). Both of these findings provide strong evidence that children use such schemata for processing and comprehending stories.

A characteristic pattern of recall across nodes also exists for the retention of story events, w ith the pattern generall y consistent for in· dividuals between 6 years o ld and adulthood. Basica lly, children and adults reca ll information from the sett ing, beginning, and outcome nodes better than from the ending or reaction nodes (Mand ler, 1978; M andler & johnson, 1977). This similari ty is qualified by a possible developmental increase in recall o f attempts, such that young chil­dren sometimes mention these items infrequently (d. Mandler & johnson, 1977), w hereas adults routinely incl ude att empts in their stories resumes. A consistent age effect , however, has been reported for the amount of information reca lled at each node, w ith adults re­membering more than young children (Mandler, 1978; Mandler & johnson, 1977).

A lthough empirica l support for Mandler' s (1983) model has been reported w ith aural narratives, no one has examined w heth er children or adults rely on a story grammar for their processing of television shows or w heth er media differences exist in the amount o f informa­lion reca lled at va rio us nodes. In regard to the first issue, several re­sea rch ers have either assumed that children use such a grammar to process televised stories (Beagles- Roos & Ga t, 1983, p. 133) or have

Story Grammar 347

noted that the possible use of such schemata may have important implications for understanding how television is processed (Merin­goff, 1980, p. 242) . Likewise, Wright et al. (1984) have sugges ted that even kindergarten children process televised stories schematically, because their comprehension is higher for sto ry programs than for magazine shows. No one, however, has reported a story grammar analysis for children's recall o f a television show, making it unclear whether such grammars have generality outside of purely aural or written presentations.

In regard to the second issue, whereas the superficial structure of televised stories does not seem to differ marked ly from that of the purely verbal discourses previo usly examined, large media differ­ences exist in th e techniques used to convey story events (e.g., th e avai lability of audio-visual versus purely aural attributes). Hence, an examinat ion of media differences in the amount and type of nodal in­forma tion reca lled seems warranted . In fact, Mandler and Johnson (1977) suggest (pp. 141 - 142) that examination of stru ctural differ­ences in the presentation of narrati ves (e.g., television cartoons vs. aural presentations) may be impo rtant for understanding children's processi ng of stories . Moreover, M andler and Johnson (1977) ques­tion whether their grammar is adequate to account for story process­ing in w hich the central theme is conveyed via dialogue among th e major characters rather than by means of an omnisc ient narrator. It is important to note that th e form er non-narrati ve approach is used fre ­quently in televised stories.

When considered in contrast to a purely aural input, several other findings suggest that televising a story might evoke di fferences in children's nodal recall. First, it has been reported that retention of visual information by young children exceeds that of auditory infor­mation for te levised presentations (Hayes & Birnbaum, 1980; Stone­man & Brody, 1983). Moreover, te levision seems to predispose espe­cia lly high attention to and retention of visual action sequences (Ca lvert, Huston , Watkins, & Wright, 1982; Meringoff, 1980), w hereas aural presentations seem to enhance retention of figurative language and dialogue, as well as inferential reason ing (Beagles- Roos & Gat, 1983; M eringoff, 1980). Because setting, attempt, and o utcome nodes often reflect information that is highly amenable to visual representa ­tion (e.g., actions, consequences, and the background in w hich th ey occur), it might be expected that a telev ised presentation would en­hance young children's retention of in formation at these nodes. On the other hand, because reactions and end ings are often dependent on verbal discourse for presentation, a radio version might augment reca ll of information at these nodes.

348 MERRILL-PALMER QUARTERLY

Because of th ese unresolved issues, and because relatively litt le is known about how child re n integrate information from television, two studies were conducted. Both were designed to examine the ap­plicability of Mandler's story syntax in accounting for subjects' reten­tion of televised stori es.

EXPERIMENT 1

The first experiment served as a precursor for a more compre­hensive examination of story apprehension. Its major purpose was to assess whether the bulk o f children's recall of a television show could be classified wi th Mandler and Johnson's (1977) story grammar, even though the major theme was conveyed primarily by dia logue (i.e., a non-narrative). It was expected that retention of televised information at the setting, beginning, and outcome nodes would exceed recall of reaction or ending information.

Method

Subjects. Fourteen preschool children (mean CA = 57.3 months) served as subjects. All were enrolled in either the Child Study Center at the Universi ty of M aine or Mister MacGregor' s Garden in Lincoln, Maine. All chi ldren came from middle-class backgrounds.

Materia's. A 6-minute segment from "Sesame Street," entitled " The Great Cookie Thief," was selected to assess children's story re­ca ll. The segment consists of a multi -episode, multi-pro tagonist story prepared by Children's Television W orkshop. Each of the six nodes comprising Mandler and Johnson's (1977) story grammar were exem­plified wi thin the segment. The plot involves a series of saloon en­counters between a group of cowboys and the Great Cookie Thief (played by the Cookie Monster). After recognizing the Cookie Thief from a Wanted Poster on the wa ll, a fearful piano player tries to alert the sheriff and his associates to th e thief's presence. Remaining skepl­ica l, one of the members o f th e group is sent to check out the suspect by comparing his eyes, fur, ~nd finally his hat w ith characteristi cs on the poster. As th e piano player's state of agitation grows with each comparison, the sheri ff eventually becomes convinced and confronts the thief. The Cookie M onster then tricks the sheriff and his asso· cia tes by drawing a mustach e on th e wanted poster, effecting a dis­crepancy in appearance between the poster and himself. Convinced th ey have made a mistake, th e accusers apologize. Saying he has not been offended, the Cookie M onster bows cou rteously and removes his hat, causing a huge stash of cookies to fall out. The segment ends w ith the sheriff and his crew rea li zing the thief's true identity and chas ing him from the saloon.

S/OIl' Grammar 349

The Appendix contains a brea kdown of the story into its constitu ­ent parts, wi th the number of major elements specified at each node. As described by Mandler and Johnson (1978), setting in formation in ­troduced th e protagonists and specified the context in w hich the story transpired. Beginning events described initiating conditions and the general problem confron ting th e pro tagonist(s). Reactions re­nected the protagonist's internal responses to the in itiating conditions or problems. Att empts comprised actions by th e protagonist to solve the problem or alter the initiating conditions. Outcomes reflected th e resulls of the protagonist' s actions. End ings comprised the resolution of the problem and overall conclusion of the story.

Testing procedure. Chi ldren were taken individuall y to a re­search area and shown th e "Sesame Street" segment. Each subject was told that a show wou ld be presented and they should wa tch and

, listen closely because they would be asked to provide a synopsis when it was over. The program was shown wh ile th e experim enter sa t adjacent to but slightly behind th e child, watching the screen atten­tive ly. tmmediately follow ing its presentation, subjects were asked, "What was that show about? Tell me w hat happened on th e show?" The subjects th en related the contents of the program in their own words. When reca ll seemed to lag, add itiona l probes were given (e.g., "Can you remember anything else about the show?" ) in order to so­licit the fu ll est possible descriptions.

Data coding. The basic pars ing system developed by Mandler and Johnson (1977) was used to code th e correct reca ll shown by each subject. The major difference in story coding between thi s ex­periment and previous st udies was a function of the non-narrat ive na­ture of th e presen t story. Nodal items were determined on th e bas is of event occurrence, regard less o f availability of verbal description . Although the present story was more complicated (i.e., w ith multi­episodes and protagonists) than m ost stories used in earlier research of this type (ef. Mandler, 1978; Stein & Glenn, 1979), few adjustm ents in the coding procedure were required. The story was quite well ­structured , according to Mand ler's standards, w ith the act ions of each protagonist generally proceeding in a sequential rather than inter­leaved fashion. Whereas items in several nodes were conveyed via visual features only, ·there were few nodes that needed to be inferred without a v isual and /or auditory representation being supplied . Using Mandler's grammar as a basis, two naive raters independent ly coded the verbatim reca ll protocols shown by subjects. O ne rater coded the responses for one-half of th e children tested. tntercoder reliability, as indexed by Cohen's (1960) Kappa, was .80, .80, .90, .82, .85, and .92 for the setting, beginning, reaction, attempt, o utcome, and ending nodes, respecti vely.

350 MERRILL-PALMER QUARTERll

Results and Discussion

As was expected, the majority (83%) of reca ll show n by childrer could be classified with Mandler's sto ry schemata. The mean numbe, o f story elements correctly recalled was 9.76, with most children pro· v iding a fairly accurate resume of the major event s. It is important to note that th e number of elements ava ilable for recall varied across the six nodes. Thus, to eva luate the possible use of th e grammar by chil­dren, the proportion of actual elements within each node (see -Ap­pendix) that were reca lled was ca lculated for each subject. The mean proportions were .27 (SO = .13), .11 (SO = .05), .01 (SO = .04), .39 (SO = .13), .35 (SO = .12), and .14 (SO = .04) for setting, beginning, reaction, attempt, outcome, and ending information, respectively. A one-way analysis of variance (based on each subject' s proportion scores) revea led a main effect for story node, F(5 , 65) = 6.5 7, P < .01. Scheffe tests (p = .05) confirmed that a greater proportion of sel­ting, attempt, and outcome informati on was recalled than was begin­ning, reaction or ending information .

That 83% of children's total correct reca ll could be coded with the nodes developed by M andler and Johnson (1977) is in accord with the notion that th eir grammar is used by children for processing televised stories. At th e very least, it demonstrates that the grammar can adequately describe children's retention of televised stories thai are non-narrative in nature. Most importantly, the pattern of recall of televised information across story nodes was generally consistent with prior resu lts in the aural narrat ive literature (see Mandler, 1978).

One finding that was not in accord with our predictions was the relatively low reca ll of beginning informati on. This apparent differ­ence may stem from the story content itself, as well as from the pro· gram's non-narrati ve style. An examination of stories previollsly used (Mandler, 1978; Mandler & Johnson, 1977) indicates that beginning nodes usually included specific, action-oriented inciden ts. In addi­ti on, a beginning is generally set off by a narrative shift (e.g. , "Now, one day ... ") indicating an episod ic transition (M andler, 1978, p. 14). The beginning information in the "Cooki e Thief," however, is primarily conversational. Hence, it is possible that the non-narrative nature of the show did nor provide the emphasis required to indicale an episodic shift. Despite this difference, it seems that the pattern of TV recall remains remarkably similar to that reported earlier wi th aural narratives.

EXPERIMENT 2

Although the findings of th e first experiment are in accord wi th the notion that children rely on a particular story grammar when pro-

Story Grammar 35 1

cess ing televised as well as aural stories, support for the conclusion that television enhances recall of attempts is limited by the use o f dif­ferent stories across the two lines of research. Thus, one purpose for conducting a second study was to contrast the retention o f noda l in ­formation when the same story was conveyed by television versus ra­dio. Second, the use of new materials also served to evaluate t~e gen­eral applicability of the grammar to te levision, because comparison of te levision subjects' nodal reca ll for two different types of dramatic shows was possible across the two experiments. A third rationale was to assess whether adults' reliance on and use of a story grammar might also vary according to the medium of input.

Method

Subjects. Serving as subjects were 44 preschool children (mean CA ~ 50.6 months) enrolled in th e Child Study Center at the Univer­sity of M aine, and 44 adults (mean CA ~ 19.8 years) enrolled in intro­ductory psychology courses at th e Universi ty of M aine. None of the children w ho participated in the first study were retested as part of Experiment 2.

Materials. Because the "Sesame Street" segment used in Experi­ment 1 was a non-narrative, it was necessary to find a new TV show that, w ithout alteration of the sound track, could be readily under­stood in the absence of video features. Based on these considera­tions, a commercially marketed (Learning Corporation o f America) cartoon version o f Rudyard Kipling's " How the Whale Got His Throat" was selected for use. Because the sound track provided a verbatim reproduction of Kipling's original text, it was possible to rec­ord th e televised sound track on a cassette and present a sensible story as an aural narrative. The story was written originally for children and is marketed for an audience between the preschool and grade­school yea rs. As with " The Great Cookie Thief, " each of the six nodes comprising M and ler and Johnson's (1977) story grammar were exem­pl ified w ith in th e story.

The basic plo t involves a whale w ho eats nearly all the fish in th e sea, but is still hungry. He then seeks advice from a Stute Fish, who advises him to try eating man. Consequently, he eats a man who is stranded on a raft. In an attempt to gain release and be taken home, the man jumps up and down in th e w hale's stomach. The man's jumping ca uses the whale discomfort, resulting in both indigestion and the hiccups. As the whale swims toward the man's home, the man builds a large grate out of his raft, whi ch he pulls into the w hale's throat upon debarking. Hence, from that day on, the whale can eat only small fish which fit thro ugh the grate in his throat. The Appendix

352 MERRI LL-PALMER QUARTERLY

contains a resume of the story, w ith th e number o f major elements specified for each node.

Testing procedure. Preschool child ren and adu lt s were adminis­tered the story individually. O ne-half o f the subjects at each age viewed and listened to th e story v ia a televised presentation. Immedi­ately following the show, subjects were directed to, " Tell me whal that story was about. " They then provided a verba l resume from memory, using their own words. When their recall seemed to lag, two more general probes were given (e.g., " What else can you remember about the story? Can you remember anything else about the story?") to solici t th e fu ll est descriptions possible. The remaining subjects al each age leve l were tested in th e same manner, except that they heard a purely aural narrati ve presented via rad io . A ll subjects were given as much time as th ey needed for reca ll.

Da ta coding. The basic parsing system developed by Mandler and Johnson (1977), described for Experiment 1, was used to code subjects' story recall. Because of the increased complexity of this story, severa l small modifications were made in the coding system. O ccas ionally, there were pieces of informat ion presented in the story that conveyed the major gist of a node (e.g., " The whale ate the star­fish and th e garfish and th e crab and the dab and th e p laice and Ihe daice ... "). When a subject included this type of e laborated infor­mation, only one item was scored as correct (i.e., S3 in Appendix) for that node. Due to th e overlap of episodes and dual-protagonists, there were times w hen a response represented a story item that oc­curred in the substories of both protagonists. When this occurred, the point o f view from w hich the subject related the event determined how it was categorized (e.g., " the w hale had the hiccoughs" was coded as an event in the whale's episode, whereas " the man gave the w hale the hiccoughs" was included in the man's substory). Two naive raters independently coded subjects' entire, verbatim protocols. One rater coded only the protocols of one-ha lf of the subjects w ithin each cond ition. Intercoder reliabilities, as assessed by Cohen's (1960) Kappa, were .8 1, .79, .86, .77, .82 and .80 for setting, beginning, reac­tion, attempt , outcome, and ending nodes, respectively.

Results and Discussion

O nce again, the bulk of subjects' re tention could be coded using Mandler'S story grammar. Of the correct recall shown by preschool­ers, 86% reflected nodal information; for adults' correct recall, 64% reflected nodal events, w ith the remaining 36% of their summations composed primarily of elaborative information (excluding inferences) ava ilable in the story. This age difference in retention of elaborati ve

Slory Grammar 353

informati on suggests that preschoolers may be more dependent on the grammar for recall than adults. In Table 1 is the proport ion of in­formation recalled at each story node accord ing to condition and age, and evidence that performance was very similar in the TV and radio condition.

As in Experiment 1, the actual number of major story elements varied across the six nodes. Thus, th e proportion o f nodal events re­called by each child was examined in a three-factor analysis o f vari ­ance. Condition (TV vs. radio) and age (preschoolers vs. adults) were entered as between-subjects fac tors, w hereas story node (setting, be­ginning, reaction, attempt , outcome, and ending) represented a within-subjects variable. The analysis revea led signi ficant main effects for story node, F(5, 420) = 97.28, p < .01, and age, F( l , 84) = 678. 18, P < .01, as well as for the interaction of these two factors, F(s , 420) =

10.36, P < .01. Overa ll, adults reca lled significa ntly more informat ion than did preschoolers. As in Experiment 1, more setting, attempt, and outcome in format ion was reca lled than beginning, reaction, or ending information. These trends were qualified, however, by the reliable in ­teraction of age w ith story node. Scheff" tests (p = .05) revea led th is interaction was d ue to adults recalling proportionally more events from the attempt than reaction node, w hereas preschoolers did not. Contrary to our expectations, no significant effects were associated with the condition factor, F( l , 84) = 1.61, P < .20.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

The major finding of thi s investigation is that, for both televised and aurally presented stories, the reca ll of children and adults was remarkably consistent in its refl ection of story grammar. In all cases, the majority of reca ll could be classified wi thin M and ler and John­IOn's (1977) story schemata, wi th the pattern generally the same: Both children and adults showed higher retent ion of setting and out ­come informa tion than they did of reaction, end ing, or beginning in ­formation. To our knowledge, this evidence is the fi rs t to suggest that both young children and adult s use the same type of grammar to me­diate reca ll of television .stories as they do for oral or w ritten ones. This fi nding extends recent work by Wright et al. (1984) by specifying in more detail the nature of the schemata that child ren may be using for TV processing.

Age differences existed primarily in the amo unt o f information reca lled at each node. O ne excepti on to this effect, however, was that adults reca lled proporti onally more att empts than reactions, whereas a similar trend wi th preschoolers was not Significant. This type of age effect has been report ed previously w ith aural narratives

TABLE 1. M ean Proportion of Nodal Information Recalled According to Age and Cond ition

Story Node

Age CondUion Setting Beginning Reaction Attempt O utcome Ending

Television M .41 .09 .03 .22 .2 1 .09

Preschool SO .14 .13 .08 .16 .11 . 17

Radio M .35 .12 .0 1 .13 .17 .02 SO .17 .15 .05 .12 .19 .06

Television M .86 .49 .40 .83 .6 1 .56

Adult SO .13 .16 .14 .2 1 .13 .16

Radio M .92 .56 .38 .8 1 .57 .50 SO .13 .16 .15 .22 .12 .24

Story Grammar 355

(Mandler & Johnson, 1977) and it may reflect deve lopmental changes in story integration, with young children showing a greater tendency to fragment the narrative into discrete and unrelated events (d. Col­lins, 1978). The interrelation of a character with an action is often nec­essary for attempts to be reca lled. Thu s, differential interassoc iation o f characters with events may partia ll y account for this age effect.

These studies advance understanding of the circumstances under which story schemata are used in several additional ways. First, w ith few exceptions, the typica l pattern of noda l reca ll occurred with sto­ries that are far more complicated and reflective of those that children usua lly experience than the o nes that have often been used for re­search of this type, that is, very sho rt narratives w ith on ly one protag­onist and a limited number o f seq uential (rather than interdependent or concurrent ) episodes (see Buss et aI. , 1983; M andler, 1978; Nez­worski, Stei n, & Trabasso, 1982). The present stories, however, in­cluded multiple protagonists and numerous episodes of extended du­ration. tn add ition, the pattern of nodal recall occurred for both narrative and non-narrative stories, w hich has not been reported pre­viously.

One unanticipated finding was the relati vely low retention of be­ginning information . That beginning information was reca lled less well, overall, than in previous reports may be a function of th e sim­plicity of story structure preva lent in discourses used before. In fact , Mandler suggests that clarity and simplicity of story structure are nec­essary for an individual to apply the story grammar. It is quite possible that the considerable amount of elaborative informat ion and interde­pendency of substories in " How the Whale Got His Throat," as well as the lack of articulated narrative shifts and frequent inclusion of be­ginnings with no action in both stories, contributed to th e relati vely low amount of reca ll at this node.

Regardless o f these differences, the data demonstrate that M an­dler's story grammar pred icts reca ll for both radio and television pre­sentations. As is refl ected in Table 1, the proportion of correct reca ll across story nodes is strikingly similar for the audio-visual and audio­alone presentations. This finding may reflect th e grammar's power as an organizing mechanism for story comprehension, regardless of the input med ium. Alternately, it may be that each of the two media ex­amined here normally use a set of formal features w hich afford more em phasis to setting and o utcome information than to events at the other nodes, even though the particular features may vary from me­dium to medium. In fact , the basic story nodes outlined by Mandler may have a unique and re latively consistent relation w ith the med ia­specific, formal features of television (e.g., camera zooms, pans, and

356 MERRILL-PALMER QUARTERLY

dissolves) and radio (e.g., sound effects, background music), with the grammar supplying th e underly ing syntactic structure and th e features serving as " punctuation marks," including when and how much ai­tention shou ld be given to a particular aspect of a story. If th is relation is clearly and consistently operating, comprehension and recall of a story may be enhanced. However, if a shift from one node to another is not emphasized by perceptually sa lient features, or if these fealures are used inconsistently, then comprehension may be adversely af­fected .

Obvio usly, further investigation is necessary to determine the re­lation between the grammatica l st ructure o f a story, including its pos­sible media-specific p unctuation, and children's attention to and re­ca ll of story events. Their noda l reca ll here certainly suggests a sensitivity to the usual format of stories. It is necessary now 10 verify the general consistency of the relation between story schemata and the formal features of the med ium, as well as to determine whether children's reca ll is a function of their expectations about how a story usually unfolds, the way a specific story is structured, or a combina­tion of the two. It may be that young children are better grammarians for specific media than would be expected, given the ava ilability of well-structured stories.

REFE RE NCES BEAGLES-RODS, J.. & GAT, J. (1983) . The specific impact of radio and television on

chi ldren 's story comprehension. Journ<l! of Educil lional Psychology, 75, 128-137.

BUSS, R. R .. YUSSEN, S. R .. MATHEWS, S. R., MILLER, G. E. , & REMBOLD, K. L. (1963). Development of children's use of a story schema to retrieve information. Developmental Psychology, 19,22 - 28.

CALVERT, S. L. , HUSTON, A. C, WATKINS, B. A. , & WRIGHT, I. C (1982). The rela· tion between se lective attent ion to television forms and children's comprehension of content. Child Development. 53, 60 1- 6 10.

COHEN, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psy· chological Measurement, 20, 37 - 46,

COLLINS, W. A. (1978). Te mporal integration and children's understanding of social information on television. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 48, 198- 204.

HAYES, D. S., & BIRNBAUM, D . w. (1980) . Preschoolers' retention of televised events: Is a picture worth a thousand words? Developmental Psychology, 16, 410- 416.

KtNTSCH, W . (1977). On comprehending stories. tn P. Carpenter & M . Just (Eds.l. Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 33-62). Hillsdale, N J: Erlbaum .

MANDLER, J. M. (1978). A code in th e node: The use of a story schema in ret rieval. Discourse Processes, " 14- 35.

MANDLER, J. M . (1983) . Re presentation. tn J. H . Flavell & E. M . Markman (Eds.), Hand· book of child psychology: Volume III. Cognitive development (pp. 420- 494). New York: Wiley.

Story Grammar 357

MANDLER, J. M ., & DEFOREST, M. (1979). Is there more than one way to reca ll a story? Child Development, 50, 886- 889.

,MANDLER, J. M ., & JOHNSON, N. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recal l. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 111 - 151 .

MERINGOFF, l. K. (1980). In fluence of the medium on children's story apprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 240- 249.

NEZWO RSK I, T. , STEIN, N. l., & TRABASSO, T. (1982). Story structure versus content in chi ldren's recall . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2 1, 196- 206.

STEIN, N. l., & GLENN, c. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elemen­tary school 'Children. In R. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 16 1- 182). Hillsdale, J: Erlbaum.

STONEMAN, Z., & BRODY, G. H. (1983). Immediate and long-term recognit ion and generalizat ion of advertised products as a function of age and presentat ion mode. Developmental Psychology, ' 9,56- 6 1.

WRIGHT, J. C , HUSTON, A. C , ROSS, R. P. , CALVERT, S. R., WEEKS, L. A .. RAEISSI, P., & POTTS, R. (1984) . Pace and continuity of television programs: Effects on chi ldren's attention and comprehension. Development.11 Psychology, 20, 653 - 666.

Node Typed and Number

51

S2

53

B4

B5

R6

A7

08

09

AID

OIl

0 12

APPENDIX

Story Nodes

The Great Cookie Thief

Story Summary

A sheri ff and his associa tes

are conferring in a saloon

about a wa nted poster of the Great Cookie Thief.

A piano player the n no tices the Cookie M o nster standing next to the poster

and in forms the sheri ff and his men.

The men become fea rfu l and confused, wanting to determine if the Cookie Monster is the Cookie Thief.

The piano player asks the others how he should verify the true identity of the Cookie Monster.

He is to ld, "Check Qut one thing at a time,"

and the fi rst thing to compare should be the eyes of the poster with those o f the Cookie M onster.

The piano player approaches the poster and the Cookie Monster, checking out their eyes.

H e verifies that th e eyes are the same

and tells his companio ns that they are identica l.

358

Node Type" clndNumber

0 13

0 14

A15

016

O t 7

0 18

0 19

A20

02 1

022

023

524

625

R26

A27

028

R29

A30

03 1

A32

A33

034

035

636

R37

A38

039

M ER RILL-PALMER QUARTERLY

Appendix-The Great Cookie Thief- continued

Story Summary

The sheriff stales that this is no t e no ugh to ma ke an arrest.

The piano player is to ld to check out his fur.

He checks out the fur and

concl udes that it looks the same.

He te lls his friends

bu t they say thaI is st ill not enough for an arrest.

He is to ld to check out the hats.

He compares the hats and

veri fies that they look the same.

He te lls his fri e nds and

they decide to confront the Cookie M onster.

The Cookie Monster moves away (rom the poster and w histles innocently.

The sheriff and his men approach the Cookie M onster,

confident that they have resolved the identity question.

The sheriff accuses the Cookie M onster of being the Greal Cookie Thief.

The Cookie M onster denies it,

looking afraid and nervous.

The Cookie Monster then tries to trick the men by claiming that he and the Cookie Thief do not have the same m ustache.

The men state their skepticism,

so the Cookie Monster has them look away,

w hile he surreptitiously draws a mustache on the poster.

The men next acknowledge the mustache on the poster

and verify that the Cookie Thief does not have one.

They apologize to the Cookie M onster,

which ca uses him to smile and look happy.

He tips his hat in acceptance of their apology

and a huge stash of cookies fa lls out.

Story G rammar 359

Appendix-The Great Cookie Thief- continued

Node Typed ,mdNumber

E40

E41

Node Typ ed and Number

51

52

53

64

65

R6

A7

08

69

RIO

All

0 12

A13

01 4

515

516

517

618

B19

R20

R21

A22

Story Summary

The men chase th e Cookie M onster from the sa loon,

ye lling that they are now certain he is the Great Cookie Thief.

How the Whale Got His Throat

Story Summaryb

O nce upon a time, there was a w hale

who lived in the sea

and ale lois of fi sh .

Finally, no fish remained

except for one w ho was his fri end .

Eventually, the w hale became hungry,

so he ate a sai lor,

which initially sa tisfi ed him.

The man remained alive and moving in the stomach

ca usi ng the w hale to hiccough w ith indigestion.

The w hale asked the man to come out

but w ith no result.

The w hale then swam the man to shore

and let the sailor out at home.

There once was a sa ilor

fl oa ting on a raft ,

wearing bright red suspenders.

The sailor was shipwrecked

and Ihen was sudde nly swallowed by Ihe whale.

The sa ilor was angry at the w hale,

as well as homesick.

Thus, he jumped up and down in the stomach

360 MERRILL-PALMER Q UARTERLY

Appendix-How the Whal e Got His Throat- continued

Node Typed

and Number

0 23

A24

0 24

E26

E2 7

E28

Story Summary

until he was finally taken home.

The sa ilor a lso built a grate out o f his ra ft a nd suspenders,

which he lodged in the whale's throat upon debarking.

This is how the whale got such a large throat

a nd w hy he o nly eats sma ll fish

and no longer eats man.

Note. Story nodes for " The Great Cookie Thief," summarized from " The Great Cookie Thief," a segment from " Sesame Street," produced by The Children'S Television Work· shop, PBT·TV, New York, 1979. Copyright by Children'S Television Workshop, 1979. Adapted by permission. Story node for " How the Whale Got His Throat," a story by Rud yard Kipling, from a cartoon version, produced by learning Corporation of Amer­ica, 1970 . Copyright by l earning Corporal ion of America, 1970. Used by permission.

as = Sell ing, B = Beginning, R = Reaction, A = Attempt , 0 = O utcome, E = Ending. bThe narrative (or Experiment 2 comprised a dual protagonist story. Summary state­ments 1- 14 reflect the whale as protagonist, whereas 15- 28 reflect the sa ilor as protag· onist.